|
Maps matter! You are absolutely right!!!
I still don't have #124 (going nuts already...), but I like the most maps of #122 and #123. Especially those of Fiendish Footprints. I like it, if the maps have a washed out-look.
Maps don't have to look cool only, they have to be useful!
A map I found absouletly awful was the first level (or courtyard) of Maure Castle. 10' per square and really small printed. Not useful for me!
When it comes to the art used in Dungeon lately - I don't like the cartoonish style either! The Styes and Quicksilver Hourglass had great art, but Final Resting Palce was AWFUL!!!
Opinions?
Since art, and I guess cartography in this case, is a matter of taste, I do have to disagree with the original poster. I feel that the art in Dungeon has been great of late and that the maps have been good as well. I do wonder at the abscence of Chris West's cartography of late though... It is sorely missed.
"The maps suck" isn't very constructive criticism.
I think the maps have been mostly really good lately. (The only real standout was the map for "Temple of the Scorpion God--I can't make heads or tales of it.) I, too, would like to say that the maps for "Fiendish Footprints" were great. I hope we see a LOT more of that guy's maps in the future!
As for the art, I'm not a fan of Du Lac and ZUB. I suppose it's good from a technical standpoint, I just don't like that style. Steve Prescott is hit or miss. His art for MMIII was pretty good (Poisondusk Lizardfolf--very nice!) and the recent Dungeon cover with Demogorgon was also neat, but his work in PGtF left a lot to be desired, as do some of his works in the current Dungeon (p. 20). His faces just aren't very good--people just don't look like that.
On a positive note, Dungeon has really been great over the last year or so. And I think 124 will go down as one of the best ever. In this issue we have 1) the first adventure for Age of Worms, a heckuva piece written by Erik himself, 2) the second installment of the Shards of Eberron arc, and 3) another level of Maure Castle by Rob Kuntz. Seriously, how can you top that?
Strange, GVD's usually much more articulate than this. Anyway, Regarding the Eberron map, have you not see the 32" x 20" detailed map of Khorvaire Web Enhancement on WotC's site?
I think the Whispering Carn maps are great. Very usable for me as a DM and easy to understand. They also have an interesting feel to them. I always want maps that are functional over 'pretty' and these fit both for me.
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
I cannot for the life of me understand why someone wouldn't like the art in "The Whispering Cairn," but the whole business is subjective so I guess I should stop trying.
Is the idea, GVD, that you don't care for Rob Lazzaretti's mapping? What about it strikes you as "cheap"? Do you prefer crisp Christopher West maps? Old black and white line art? Campaign cartographer?
Personally, while not every map is a gem, I think the the cartography in Dungeon is leagues above the cartography in just about any other RPG product I can imagine*. I understand that others may feel differently, but I don't feel like the original post in this thread gave me enough information to understand what the poster is talking about.
Which artists we use tends to be a factor of who's available and who we think would bring a nice touch to a given article. Sometimes, things don't work out as well as we'd expected, and other time artists exceed our expectations.
Once upon a time, not too long ago, Dungeon art was uniformly by the likes of Terry Dykstra, Jim Halloway, and Valarie Valusek. Do you propose that the art was better in the magazine back then?
If the magazine has slipped in quality of art lately, where did it slip from, and when? What represents, in your mind, the pinnacle of Dungeon art?
--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dragon & Dungeon
* Except perhaps Harnmaster, but while I like that style I do not think it particularly appropriate for core Dungeons & Dragons.
Wow, bonus points for mentioning Harnmaster, I love their maps even though I agree they would not be appropriate for your magazine.
I prefer Christopher West's maps over Robert Lazzaretti's. Although I have to say that Roberts seem to have gotten better over time. I was disappointed when I saw Rob was doing the maps for the new adventure path. Will he be doing all of them like Christopher did for Shackled City?
|
|
I thought the art and cartography for the Whispering Cairn was pretty darn good.
I would like to say that I hope Dungeon avoids "cartoony" styles as much as possible. I find them a detraction from otherwise good adventures, and it renders the art useless for showing my players. This is particularly likely with low level adventures in my experience.
That being said, I didn't particularly like the art on page 51 of the Diamond Lake backdrop. I personally wouldn't classify it as "cartoony" (there are no chibi figures, after all) - but it lacks a certain amount of realism - the 'muscle-bound warrior' is almost laughable.
I wasn't particularly fond of the art in the "Temple of the Scorpion God". The color palette is somewhat muted. The map could also be improved. For example, there is a clearly marked stair leading from the forest to the main level of the temple. In the center is something that COULD be a stairway, though composed of massive steps. Reading the description reveals this to be the case, but that is certainly the kind of thing a map should be able to answer more definitively than the text. The tapestries that hang between rooms 3A and 3B are somewhat difficult to see (low contrast with the grid) and are not defined by the map. As long as those tapestries are illustrated, it wouldn't hurt to include the other, or the general location of the piled furs.
The cartography of the "Chamber of Antiquities" works for me. The art isn't inspired, but it is serviceable. I can show it to my players without worrying about them snickering.
I prefer Christopher West's maps over Robert Lazzaretti's.
It's funny how people can disagree so much on these issues. :-)
Aside from the fact that Lazzaretti's walls and such don't always match up with the grid well, I really like his maps--and I think that they are much better than West's.
West wrote a really great adventure a few issues back, but his maps always look way too "computer-y" for my tastes.
the 'muscle-bound warrior' is almost laughable.
Yeah...that was pretty bad.
Personally I prefer the old black and white maps. Not for their art but for their utility. A really cool map that the players only get to see after the adventure is of limited use. The map is given to the PCs a room at a time drawn on graph paper. I view the fancy maps as a waste of money.
I'd certainly not go back. In fact in terms of maps Dungeon has, in my opinion, steadily improved over the years. The early black and white maps where brutally functional. The black and white maps made just before the magazine went into colour where extremely good. I think in general the colour ones are better but its a bit more hit and miss. Colour can detract under some conditions - particularly in the case of making maps harder to understand. That said when they hit the nail on the head colour can make a good back extraordinary. It can also help in helping the DM understand complex environments which is an important component of the maps.
I do however wonder why there is almost no utilizing any of the more 3D type mapping techniques. Personally I always found that sort of thing really helped me create interesting and exciting adventures for my players. I would like to have particularly like to have seen something more 3D done with the Waterfall Caverns Map on P. 26 of Dungeon #123.
I'd like as much thought and work as possible done by the cartographers and those submitting projects as well as editing them etc. to create thrilling adventures full of excitement and a sense of wonder. Of course I think thats the goal of everyone involved in the process.
|
|
As I said above - the only art which I found not fitting was for FINAL RESTING PLACE. I have no problem with ZUB or the others. I checked Dungeon issues from #82 on to get an overview of the maps. After finishing this, my first impression was: Almost only good quality with some outstanding maps (IMHO), which are:
#82: Eye for an Eye
Maps and art are really great!!!
#84 Dungeon of the Fire Opal
The art of Jason A. Engle is really cool!
#88 The Seventh Arm
Hey Eric, you have to let Stephen Daniele do more work in your magazine. The art and cartography by him is fantastic!
#94 Spiral of Manzessine
cartography by Kyle Hunter is very good. I like the look of his maps in this adventure!
And of course - never had to say any bad about the art by Wayne Reynolds ;)
#96 Pandemonium in the Veins
Cartography by Arnie Swekel - Great!
#105 Racing the Snake
As well, good artwork and cartography
#106 Tammeraut'S Fate
see #105
And this is going on and on...
I know, that you can't please everyone of your readers, Eric. But be assured, you please most of them! Of course, there will always be maps and art which are below standard, but as long as the overall quality stays at it is, evrything will be ok! At least for me.
I was promised, that my issue #124 will arrive today. Man, I hope it will. I wonder how the maps realy are...
Oh, and one more thing - Even if everyone is saying that we germans like it correct ;) I love it, if the maps don't fit onto the grid! That gives them a feeling like they are reprinted from original maps - except for the grid of course!
|
|
Oh, and even ONE MORE thing:
I just want you all to think about a single module you can buy.
I bought, i.e. "Shadows of the Last War", which is a very nice piece of an adventure, but the art and cartography is... well, I think you know what I want to say here, don't you?!
Dungeon rocks -as always...
If only #124 would arrive :(
I dislike the cartoonish art, also. As well as characters with the "urban primitive" Dungeonpunk look. The combination of the two really ruined the art in adventures like Final Resting Place for me.
I would prefer more naturalistic art (fewer distorted bodily proportions and exaggerated facial expressions on human characters) as well as some good black-and-white pieces. Any artist will tell you that some moods and scenes are better-depicted in black-and-white. Honestly, go back and look at a piece of D&D art like, say, Emirikol the Chaotic from the original DMG. That piece is immortal for good reason. Ask yourself if it could be executed half as well in the glossy full-color, supremely disposable "Magic: the Gathering" style used today. No, it could not. It had to be a black-and-white line drawing. Another thing black-and-white art is generally superior for: Invoking dread or horror. Every drawing/painting form has its place in D&D art. Color art can be fine, too, but don't stick to flash for the sake of flash. That's empty and monotonous and your audience can sense that perfectly well.
One more personal pet peeve: Please stop letting Wayne Reynolds paint "portrait" style covers! He draws the most hideous triangle-headed, pinch-mouthed freak excuses for human(oids) EVER. It is butt-friggin-fugly! On the other hand, give him something like this month's "Age of Worms" cover where the focus isn't on his human characters' freakishy-deformed heads and it looks great. The man can draw many things beautifully, but he CANNOT do faces that don't make the Baby Jesus projectile vomit and his attempts make me want to take an X-acto knife to my covers to cut-out some of the more agonizing trangular patches.
AAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
So, uh, carry on. ;)
Maps do indeed matter.
D&D players have a cartography fetish. We like the maps of mystery not because we'll ever actually "use" them in an adventure, but because they are so *evocative*. We like them for the same reason we liked the giant map of Undermountain, for the same reason we liked Erol Otus's side view of the ruins and dungeon from the Basic Set.
I'm sure it's not lost on anybody that the Greyhawk map issues sold so well. They didn't sell because we have a Greyhawk fetish, they sold because we have a map fetish.
Issue #124
Spash page for Temple of the Scorpion God? Thumbs down. Composition? large areas of washed out ruined courtyard and stone encompass most of the image. The illustration style is loose and lazy.
The Rival Adventurers on page 51? Is He-Man in this one? We are supposed to look forward to putting our players against him in a few adventures. This was a great opprtunity to introduce Auric. I can't show my players this image. It'll ruin the adventure path.
The art in this first adventure does not come close to the "Oh, #$@%" reaction I had when I first saw the fold-out map of Cauldron. That map I could show my players (and still have on my game room wall) and it fires all of our imaginations.
I guess after reading the Diamond Lake setting you guys are trying to go for a kind of HBO's "Deadwood" feel to the town. "...where desperate folk toil in lightless depths for a pittance while ruthless mine managers live in relative largesse, ruthlessly scheming..." anyway, sounds a little like it to me. The art is supposed to show that. Give me something I can show my players that really capures the feel of that town. The map is utilitarian, usefull, but it dosen't make me go wow.
Oh, and please, a new pic of Auric before he begins to be reffered to as "He-Man on this board. (I might just be the one to instigate it)
>> Oh, and please, a new pic of Auric before he begins to be reffered to as "He-Man on this board. (I might just be the one to instigate it)
And the iconic chaaracter on page 20. When did Wonder Woman become a D&D adventurer?
Since we're here, let me put in a positive note for Eva Widermann. Her art is great, and I hope to see a lot more of it in the future.
Bah, I'm clearly in the minority here, but I like the cartoonish art. Until I hang a projector from the ceiling and write a program to reveal room by room at 25mm scale onto my table, the dungeon maps don't hurt me. I think they look fine; they don't need to be perfect to work. I'd rather see different artists and different cartographers with different styles than everything done by the same people with the same style all the time.
All things aside, the Cauldron fold out map is still hanging in my gaming room, even though we finished the Adventure Path a while ago. That map is a great piece of work.
Wow, GVD! Brilliantly put. I went through each of the issues you mentioned and found myself nodding in agreement. My original idea for the overland Cold Marshes map was different than the final version, so I had personal bias against it. But that's a differnt subject.
Jeremy McDonald mentioned something I'd like to point out as a request to Erik. Please, please, please throw in some 3D maps. If you want a good example of the type I mean, open up module I6 Ravenloft. That map still captures my imagination like none other ever has. David Sutherland was a f-ing genius! His maps brought the module to life for me so much more than a flat 2D representation would have ever done. PLEASE, provide some maps like that!!!
Personally I prefer the old black and white maps. Not for their art but for their utility. A really cool map that the players only get to see after the adventure is of limited use. The map is given to the PCs a room at a time drawn on graph paper. I view the fancy maps as a waste of money.
I, too, miss the old graphed-out b&w maps. It's what we grew up on inside the module covers. Sure, colors can pretty up a map but they can just as easily muddy them up. Photocopying the color maps can also have less tha desired effects depending on the quality of the copier (the copier at the Safeway by my work makes everything look like the FBI documents one can petition for through the Freedom of Information Act.)
While I haven't played any of Goodman Games' modules just the fact that they chose to go with the classic mapping style makes me want to play/run them. When I sketch out a map for an adventure of my own I don't scan it into the comp, paint the hell out of it then color-print it. No, I grab my mechanical pencil, art gum, graph paper (I can't seem to find any of that green-lined paper that had something like 10 squares to the inch) and I make a map. If I'm ambitious I'll ink the map when done but not always. It's functional, it works.
Maybe if I was playing with minis I'd invest in Dundjini or CC2Pro and make glorious color mats for the figures but I'm not.
So, in conclusion, I like b&w maps (and I miss the easier-to-read b&w pages in the D&D books & magazines) and always will favor the simpler maps over the full-color ones.
But that's just my 2cp.
- Chris Shadowens
Please, please, please throw in some 3D maps. If you want a good example of the type I mean, open up module I6 Ravenloft. That map still captures my imagination like none other ever has. David Sutherland was a f-ing genius! His maps brought the module to life for me so much more than a flat 2D representation would have ever done. PLEASE, provide some maps like that!!!
That map was brilliant but it can go beyond that. I'm generally negative of the modules in the Dragonlance series but the exception was some of the maps. In fact I like some of their maps so much that I used them to create other adventures for my players. The Map of Pax Tharkas was very good for its 3D aspects and the map of the Ruins of Xak Taseroth are exceptionally evocative. The whole dungeon takes place in a series of underground ruins which the players navigate through things like cauldron elevators, sewer pipes out of a tube slides nightmare and massive cliffs involving climbing down a ladder of vines that drops 1000 feet into a mist shrouded sunken city. My players wandered much of the dungeon with eyes like plates - it was great.
Its this sort of thing I would like to see in some of the maps in Dungeon. I want Goblin Lairs that appear to be made out of hamster tubing or other unique elements that go beyond the basic floor plan.
That said I don't quite know why the 3D perspective in line with what was done in the Ravonloft module has not become some kind of a standard for doing buildings. Was there something wrong with that style of perspective that I missed? It seemed to make the whole building so clear and understandable. It all just fit together in such a clear manner. When I first saw this I thought that the bar had been raised and we could never go back ... but apparently I was wrong but I can't fathom why.
Quite frankly I find the large variety of art to be a bonus - call it low concentration span but I get bored if there's too much of the same style throughout the mag. Having said that, I do prefer that ongoing adventures (mini arcs or APs) have a consistancy to their art work, with only one or two artists doing the lot.
As for the maps, as long as they are able to be clearly read, I generaly pretty happy, although the Cold Wastes didn't do a lot for me, but I'd nudged it into my own campaign world and so was using my own area map anyway.
Mind you, whilst the glossy colour maps are great to look at; as a couple of others have pointed out, not much beats the trusty old black and white maps for clarity.
Just call me a Luddite.
Reggie
My, but there are some whiny people on these boards! The art and maps in Dungeon are fine. I prefer the variance in style. It beats the 'clip art' feel of earlier issues.
My only gripe is when a dungeon or building map is done in anything other than 5'squares, but I work around that.
I'm sure it's not lost on anybody that the Greyhawk map issues sold so well. They didn't sell because we have a Greyhawk fetish, they sold because we have a map fetish.
I'm sure we'll get to test that theory, but you may be right!
...I will find the utility of Dungeon even further reduced.
I have this radical new concept for you. Don't buy the magazine!
That way, you'll no longer feel the need to come here and whine about how crappy it is, and I won't have to put up with your spam pushing other, far more interesting, posts down the page.
So is perhaps one response to "bland" maps to ask authors to submit adventures with more map detail to start with?
For myself, the problem/issue is not really bland maps per se but just that I think that by utilizing certian kinds of perspective mapping techniques one can get even more impressive maps at least some of the time. For examply I think Issue #122's 'The Forsaken Arch' could have had a truely jaw dropping map if it had been rendered in a 3D perspective that showed off both the arch itself and the fact that that adventure is in reality quite three dimensional - players are crossing over or under the arch, climbing sloped passages and falling down pits into the sea etc. Do that 'Ravenloft' style and it will likely be freaken impressive - not just to look at either. A map like this makes it easier for the DM to convey the exciting environment to the PCs and improves the whole gaming session.
|
No, I grab my mechanical pencil, art gum, graph paper (I can't seem to find any of that green-lined paper that had something like 10 squares to the inch) and I make a map.
- Chris Shadowens
Sorry, Chris, but I have no way (that I know of) of responding directly here, so others will have to read this message, too. :(
Anyway, I've got some of that green paper you're referring to. It's called "Graph Sheets, tracing paper, 50% rag". Mine is a pack of 100 sheets at 11"x16.5" (the grid is 10 divisions per inch, 10"x15") from Keuffel & Esser Co., Morristown/NJ 07960. Maybe that information will help you find a supplier. :)
We now return you to our regularly scheduled program...
|
|
Thanks for all the kind words about my work, folks! Like any artist, I'm always deeply gratified when I read about people enjoying the stuff I create. :)
Sorry I didn't stumble into this thread sooner! There are several interesting points of discussion I'd like to reply to:
I do wonder at the abscence of Chris West's cartography of late though... It is sorely missed.
I've missed it, too, but the truth is that Paizo and Wizards of the Coast have both been keeping me VERY busy lately. Like "busier than ever before" kind of busy. :) In addition to doing some extra stuff for the collected Shackled City Adventure Path hardcover, I've also been working on miniatures-scale map tiles for the Game Mastery products...and I'm really proud of the stuff I've been doing for these projects! Some of my best work yet, in my opinion.
For WotC, I've been working diligently on poster maps and tiles for the Star Wars miniatures game. I've also been working on maps for a Forgotten Realms book, AND doing a ton of new modern-era maps (matching the style of my Global Positioning maps) for a much-requested collected and expanded volume of those Polyhedron features in a book called "Critical Locations".
So, while I've been absent from the pages of Dungeon lately and my website is many months out of date, I've not been idle. :) You'll probably get sick of seeing my name on things this summer and fall! ;-)
All things aside, the Cauldron fold out map is still hanging in my gaming room, even though we finished the Adventure Path a while ago. That map is a great piece of work.
Thanks! If you liked the original, just wait until you see the map included in the new hardcover! You might want to start making room on that wall for another map of Cauldron... <insert evil grin here>
I'm curious though: How much detail from maps submitted by authors ends up in the final products, and how much is placed by the artist? That is, if an author does not place barrels, beds, bookshelves, debris, and other detail, is the cartographer likely to take artistic license and include those? I find it rather doubtful.
I can't speak for other cartographers, but I certainly do try to include details like that, even if the author didn't. When I'm given a project, I always ask for a copy of the author's work that will accompany it, and make sure I read it as thoroughly as possible before getting started. This not only clarifies the intent and layout of the map in my head, but it also inspires the subtle details that I find really fun to illustrate that might not otherwise make it into a map. (Magical glowing effects, textures and colors for floors, the unusual subtance a wierd altar might be made out of, and things like that.)
There isn't always room on a map to include all of those details, so sometimes you need to be judicial about what room features to include and what to leave out...but I like to include them whenever possible. (Of course, I've also been known to include "easter eggs" in some of my maps (mostly modern stuff, but some of my fantasy work, too), which may or may not relate to the adventure itself.
So is perhaps one response to "bland" maps to ask authors to submit adventures with more map detail to start with?
That certainly helps, so long as you don't overload your maps with so much detail that layout of your room becomes less clear. As important as readability is in the finished map, it's almost more important in the maps that the author creates, because these directly inspire the finished work and any ambiguity in the original sketch can translate into major problems if the cartographer misunderstands the layout and renders it incorrectly.
For example, lets say you have a map where two tunnels cross, one going above the other so that they don't actually intersect. If the author's sketch isn't clear about this, the cartographer might think they do intersect and illustrate them as a four-way intersection. Just imagine the confusion on your gaming table if the guys at Paizo don't catch such an error! (They're awesome at noticing these things, but still mostly human--and even demigods can make mistakes, I'm told...)
So the inclusion of detail in the author's map is very good, so long as the map is still clear and legible. If it's so cluttered with details that the cartographer has a hard time reading it, that's a step in the wrong direction...we can, and do, read the area descriptions to find interesting new details to highlight in the finished map.
By the way, I'm both honored and humbled with the comparison of my work to Rob Lazzaretti's beautiful maps. I was originally inspired to try my hand at professional cartography through my enjoyment of his work, and his enthusiasm for my early maps is what motivated me to put together a portfolio of maps and take it with me to Gen Con several years ago, where I met Christopher Perkins (editor of Dungeon at the time) and got my first professional cartography work in the pages of the magazine! Lazz also gave me my first assignment for Wizards of the Coast...some starship movement diagrams for the free Warships PDF download for the Alternity game. He helped me get into the business of making RPG maps, so it's an honor to be compared in a favorable way to such a talented artist.
-Christopher West
No, I grab my mechanical pencil, art gum, graph paper (I can't seem to find any of that green-lined paper that had something like 10 squares to the inch) and I make a map.
- Chris Shadowens
Sorry, Chris, but I have no way (that I know of) of responding directly here, so others will have to read this message, too. :(
Anyway, I've got some of that green paper you're referring to. It's called "Graph Sheets, tracing paper, 50% rag". Mine is a pack of 100 sheets at 11"x16.5" (the grid is 10 divisions per inch, 10"x15") from Keuffel & Esser Co., Morristown/NJ 07960. Maybe that information will help you find a supplier. :)
We now return you to our regularly scheduled program...
Hey, thanks for the tip. I found a few sheets in a stack of old maps, tablets & character sheets not long ago. The stuff I liked to use was from Mead (which I'd be able to tell you exactly what it was except I just last night packed it away & moved it to our new apartment.) I Googled Keuffel & Esser and came across draftingsteals.com which does sell Engineering Computational pads that use the green ink and come in 5/10/20sq/inch. I also found some isometrically graphed pads for those cool isometric maps ala the old Ravenloft module (and didn't the UA or Dungeoneers Survival Guide show us isometic mapping?) Thanks again for the info. I'll have to look for some next trip to Office Max/Depot.
- Chris Shadowens